…so you are not the father to a child, yet you still pay child support. How did this happen? This is not uncommon in courts across America; there are infrequent news stories highlighting some of the more expensive cases, such as when a man in Texas was ordered to pay 30,000 dollars in back child support for a child that was not his. There is a legal answer, that is commonly put forth to society, that focuses on the best interests of the child…yet is this the true reason? Or does a state government have a vested interest that we are not told about?